Get Swarm service logs

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, which cover safety and idempotency. The description 'Get logs' aligns with these annotations. No additional behavioral details (e.g., pagination, format, rate limits) are provided. With annotations carrying the burden, the description adds no extra value, earning a baseline 3.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence of five words, perfectly concise and front-loaded. Every word is necessary, and there is no redundancy or extraneous information. It earns top marks for conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simplicity of the tool (log retrieval), the schema covers all parameters, and annotations provide safety context, the description is mostly complete. However, it lacks any hint about the output format or potential behavior (e.g., line truncation, encoding). With no output schema, a brief note on return structure would improve completeness, but current level is adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with all four parameters (environmentId, serviceId, tail, timestamps) fully described in the schema. The tool description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Get logs from a Swarm service' clearly states the verb (Get) and resource (logs from a Swarm service). It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like arcane_swarm_get_service, which retrieves service details, and arcane_swarm_list_services, which lists services. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for retrieving logs but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no exclusions or context about when not to use it. However, given the sibling list, this is the only log retrieval tool, so implicit usage is understood. A score of 3 reflects the lack of explicit direction.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.